North Carolina's Shocking Legal Rape Law

reply to post by hotbakedtater


what if the man becomes to rough during the act? she doesn't like it and tells him to stop? he becomes violent? this just gave men the excuse of "well she said she had a rough rape fantasy and i was happy to grant her wish!"
a ready made excuse by the courts.

As a woman, I see both sides to this. One, I feel very very sorry for men who can have their lives ruined by a woman claiming one thing: rape. Even if there was no rape. All she has to do is claim it and his life is ruined.

Two, on the other hand, I believe that one can take back their consent. Reality is, sex can hurt. And for various reasons. If two consenting adults are having sex and the women says, stop this hurts and the man does not, then what does one do in that situation? It then becomes forced non-consensual sex. And what is forced non-consensual sex? Rape.

Any man who will not stop because a woman says stop - is setting himself up for huge problems. This goes for homosexuals too.

For me the line stops at the moment the woman says no.

It doesn't matter if she originally said yes.

If she tells him to stop (especially if he is hurting her) and he does not, it then becomes forced sex which = sexual assault or rape. People can and will argue gray areas here (and there absolutely are) and each situation will be individual, but the bottom line is no means no and stop means stop. It should be respected...

reply to post by LadySkadi


Very one layered opinion for something that could put someone behind bars for years of their life based on a single prepubescent sex act that is probably being embellished by the alleged victim's father.

reply to post by Brood


Where do you get one-layered out of what I just wrote?

I said there would be gray areas.

I said situations would be individual.

I said that if someone says no or stop, that should be respected.

To use a cute analogy from Christian theology: If a man throws himself off a cliff but repents before he hits the ground, is he guilty of suicide? Most Catholic theologians will say no, he is not, and I think they're right. If you repent before you hit the ground, you go to heaven.

Similarly here, if a woman consents to sex (throws herself off the cliff) and then changes her mind (repents) before she hits the ground (he finishes) than it's no longer consensual sex (suicide).

The point at issue is the "Act" itself. What is the act? At first, it is "consensual sex" and the law does not apply. The moment she says "No, please stop" the nature of the Act has changed, and the man is legally required to stop immediately - even if he's two strokes away from the most amazing orgasm of his life.

Perhaps the problem could be solved by adding a "new" definition for the Act. Rather than "consensual sex" and "Rape", call these post-penetration refusals to stop "involuntary rape", and reduce the sentences substantially.

As for the "social stigma" and "damage to his reputation", well... I'm an old-fashioned kind of guy and, quite frankly, if you want a good reputation you shouldn't go round sticking your penis into strange, flakey women. Whatever happened to getting to know and trust someone before you have sex with them?

No, no sympathy for the men. Not from me. You're the one with the power, so the added obligation and risk is also on you. Doesn't mean you have to be a hermit, or live in fear of betrayal - just make better decisions about who you're going to sleep with.

reply to post by LadySkadi

but the bottom line is no means no and stop means stop.

I'm by no way saying he should have kept going, but I do think things can get confusing when you're young and inexperienced and this can't just be looked at as "NO MEANS NO, now kiss your mother and baby brother and get in the slammer next to our newest eviscerator." Should he be punished? Yes. Should he be measured on the same scale as thieves, rapists, and murderers? Absolutely not.

reply to post by Brood


I don't disagree with you, necessarily - I am writing what I think the *general ideal should be and giving allowance for individual cases and gray areas. My underlying point is that whomever one is with, should be respected when the situation goes from yes to no... There is usually a reason (being hurt, as in this case, is a good reason) and going forward after someone changes their mind puts the person in a really risky position, as well.

reply to post by LadySkadi


I agree then

Maybe it needs a new word, not rape but a sub category. Many people claim once they start, they cant stop. But if she says no, the answers no. You can say no, rape! when you already gave consent, but you can say stop. In which case they should stop. I don't know how he could continue with her screaming rape in pain, and still think everything's okay. Is it rape? Maybe not traditionally, but definitely a type of rape. It's still unwanted sex.

Originally posted by dementedtheclown
I don't know how he could continue with her screaming rape in pain

This is why I'm not so ready to believe any of it after realizing the possiblity of it just being something she just told her parents afterward to avoid them questioning her personal judgement on her sexual behavior.

reply to post by dementedtheclown


Well, yeah. It's an assault as surely as being punched in the face.

Originally posted by Brood
This is why I'm not so ready to believe any of it after realizing the possiblity of it just being something she just told her parents afterward to avoid them questioning her personal judgement on her sexual behavior.

True, also would be impossible to prove without a confession.

reply to post by CX


The people passing this laws are men this means that when they are in the heat of the moment and ready to strike "Their littler mind overpower the main brain" and they can not take no for answer, so now they can get away with it.

This is a joke against women and this law should be repealed.

What madness is this? Who made this decision?

I can't believe that anyone would defend this. Why is the decision so wrong? This is so far out of touch, it's unbelievable.

I bet that if this happened to that judge's daughter the judgement would have been different.

First off, I flagged this thread hoping this thread will get front and center and get some attention. This in my opinion is an issue that deserves more awareness.

Now that being said as I was reading through this thread I was disgusted with some of the responses. No means no, no matter when it is said. If a women consents to sex, she is allowed to take consent away. So can a man, however the chances of that are pretty slim. By saying that a women can not take consent back, you open a whole new can of worms. At what point do you draw the line? What if she consents to sex, but maybe not the type of sex that HE wants? In essence this law says she can't and she should just shut up and take it. What about women who drink too much? What if a women consented to sex earlier in the night, and after being out partying she passes out. Does that mean since she consented earlier it is still ok even if she is passed out?

I am a man, and I would imagine many men have been in a situation where sex was consentual but for one reason or another she wanted to stop. I admit, it sucks and it sure can give you an attitude, but guess what?? I stop. That is her right to say no. Weather it hurts, she doesnt feel well, has a headache, whatever the reason may be it is her right to refuse. Just because your a guy and it sucks to have blue balls... too bad.

Originally posted by dementedtheclown
Maybe it needs a new word, not rape but a sub category. Many people claim once they start, they cant stop. But if she says no, the answers no. You can say no, rape! when you already gave consent, but you can say stop. In which case they should stop. I don't know how he could continue with her screaming rape in pain, and still think everything's okay. Is it rape? Maybe not traditionally, but definitely a type of rape. It's still unwanted sex.

I would call it sexual assault. That is exactly what it is.

I agree, No means No, and I for the record am a guy! On the other hand, I know much of you are going to beat up on me for this but, lets think of this from a teenage point of view. This comes from personal experience, I was a teenager once, with all the sex drive that teenage guys have. I started dating a girl who was a year younger than me, and well, I was always the shy one so I never even considered “making a move” on her first. One day while joking around I said F$&^ You, well to my surprise, her response was “ok right now!”. Keep in mind that we both had never done it before. We both agreed to give it a shot. We both have been steady dating for 6mo. She had even had that talk with her mother that 17ys old girls have. We practiced safe sex, but during the actual moment, having never felt that before, once the penetration started she said it hurt, then winced, then said stop, and you are one stroke from satisfaction, what do you think a teenage guy is going to do? Right! .. Well also want to point out she did not scream rape! was a bit like wtf, but that was the end of it, we dated for the next 6ys. Does it really have to get to this point. Why is she sleeping with someone who, (over something like this) would not think of what the damage will be to her friend? Was it really that traumatic?

See, with stuff like this, men need to be VERY CAREFUL whom they decide to fool around with. Sex crime laws and laws of consent are very touchy. The woman decides to withdraw consent after they start, who's to say the guy heard or even paid attention in the heat of the moment? Or she decided to want to stop and not tell him, yet claimed she did? Nine times out of ten, they will take the woman's word at face value.
The only way a guy can protect themselves is to record the act for legal purposes.

Personally, after I've started having sex with a woman, she's NEVER told me to stop.

Guess I'm doing something right.

However, I agree that if a woman were to ask a man to stop, he should do so immediately. People change their minds all the time.